The Leica Freedom Train

It's baffling how the same society could produce Schindler and Leitz as well as Hitler and his band of goons.
 
Rayt said:
They wanted to make Germany great again. We have seen these people before in history.
Click to expand...
The modern parallel you allude to is incorrect.

There is fundamentally nothing wrong with Germans wanting post-WWI Germany to be "great again": they suffered severe and disproportionate punishment by the treaty of Versailles. They could've been allowed to recover and prosper, to be a peaceful country, but Hitler and his Nazis took that desire and with his hatred transformed it into the horror that followed.

Likewise, there is nothing wrong with wanting the US to be economically strong so that its citizens prosper and are not dependent on energy and critical products from its enemies. There is nothing wrong with wanting the US military to be strong so that weakness does not encourage bold aggression and military adventures from its enemies. There is nothing wrong with the US wanting its borders to be at least as secure as those of other countries instead of wide open to anyone. Fortunately, we do not and did not have anything like a Hitler or Nazi party in control of the US government.
 
Pál_K said:
The modern parallel you allude to is incorrect.

There is fundamentally nothing wrong with Germans wanting post-WWI Germany to be "great again": they suffered severe and disproportionate punishment by the treaty of Versailles. They could've been allowed to recover and prosper, to be a peaceful country, but Hitler and his Nazis took that desire and with his hatred transformed it into the horror that followed.

Likewise, there is nothing wrong with wanting the US to be economically strong so that its citizens prosper and are not dependent on energy and critical products from its enemies. There is nothing wrong with wanting the US military to be strong so that weakness does not encourage bold aggression and military adventures from its enemies. There is nothing wrong with the US wanting its borders to be at least as secure as those of other countries instead of wide open to anyone. Fortunately, we do not and did not have anything like a Hitler or Nazi party in control of the US government.
Click to expand...
So far...
 
Amazing. I don't think I've ever seen a person quit a forum with so little cause. Hopefully, he's not one of those people who go around calling people 'snowflakes.'
 
We are best off when we can accept and acknowledge different viewpoints within our communities, whether actual or virtual. We all share a common love of photography, and can focus on sharing that without abandoning our differences. Myself, I lean pretty far left, and have gone head-to-head with other members when politics has found its way into discussions, as it always will. But my disagreements have never led me to consider quitting, and I value all members' contributions without feeling we have to agree on matters beyond photography.
I value Pal K's intelligence, knowledge and wit. Perhaps we don't agree on political issues, but I hope he reconsiders his choice to leave.
 
Pál_K said:
The modern parallel you allude to is incorrect.

There is fundamentally nothing wrong with Germans wanting post-WWI Germany to be "great again": they suffered severe and disproportionate punishment by the treaty of Versailles. They could've been allowed to recover and prosper, to be a peaceful country, but Hitler and his Nazis took that desire and with his hatred transformed it into the horror that followed.

Likewise, there is nothing wrong with wanting the US to be economically strong so that its citizens prosper and are not dependent on energy and critical products from its enemies. There is nothing wrong with wanting the US military to be strong so that weakness does not encourage bold aggression and military adventures from its enemies. There is nothing wrong with the US wanting its borders to be at least as secure as those of other countries instead of wide open to anyone. Fortunately, we do not and did not have anything like a Hitler or Nazi party in control of the US government.
Click to expand...


WW I German reparations were ruinous and the foundation of WW II. Read Erich Maria Remarque's The Black Obelisk for an interesting novel on the subject.

The US argued strongly against the ruinous reparations demanded by the European powers. And had to help bail these same powers out of the mess they created. There were those in the US arguing to make Germany an agricultural state after WW II (The Strauss Plan IIRC) but General Marshall's more enlightened approach as The Marshall Plan rebuilt Germany. Ludwig Erhard helped when he told the Germans to throw away their ration books and Germany has been a stable, democratic economic engine in Europe since. The better postwar program for the defeated is obvious. I would hope we can learn.
 
Just to put a cap on postwar Germany, my mother's side is from Berlin. When the war was over my grandmother started shipping clothes (our hand-me-downs), food, schmalz (rendered pork fat), soap, coffee, anything grandma thought could be needed. The war was over, these were family and friends and they were in really rough shape. That went on for a few years. All of the outgrown clothes in the family went to grandma's basement and then to Berlin. The war was over, they were family. Und so gehts. I am sure lots of folks bailed out their families in Germany and the other destroyed countries. This is how we act.
 
Retro-Grouch said:
We are best off when we can accept and acknowledge different viewpoints within our communities, whether actual or virtual. We all share a common love of photography, and can focus on sharing that without abandoning our differences. Myself, I lean pretty far left, and have gone head-to-head with other members when politics has found its way into discussions, as it always will. But my disagreements have never led me to consider quitting, and I value all members' contributions without feeling we have to agree on matters beyond photography.
I value Pal K's intelligence, knowledge and wit. Perhaps we don't agree on political issues, but I hope he reconsiders his choice to leave.
Click to expand...

I hadn’t seen the outcome of this thread. Bit of a shame. If we can’t hear differing views then we just reinforce the polarisation that is already damaging our society and politics.

I have left a forum over a political argument. However, the cause wasn’t a difference in views but because when I asked (what turned out to be) an awkward question, instead of a simple answer I was accused of being all sorts of things and no one else was willing to call the accuser out. Amusingly, what I was accused of was diametrically opposed to my political views and far more extreme. I simply wasn’t aligned enough with the accuser;)

‘In real life’ I expect to maintain friendships with all sorts of people. We met an old friend the other day who is politically our opposite in many ways and yet his approach to caring for his, somewhat wayward, step daughter is exactly as ours would be. Humanity isn’t summed up in a political position.

As for the Leica train, it’s one of the reasons I have been comfortable buying a number of new Leica cameras over the years. There are still other German businesses that will not receive my money - particularly if there has been no sense of change at the top. I apply the same approach to other businesses as well and do not think Herman people are either especially good or bad - just people like the English, French and even Americans;)
 
anneapplebaum.substack.com

Autocracy Inc

a sneak peek for subscribers
anneapplebaum.substack.com anneapplebaum.substack.com

"Five weeks from now, my new book will be published: Autocracy, Inc: The Dictators Who Want to Rule the World. It’s a short book, an argument, really, about the way the world now works. I think of it as the opening of a discussion rather than a definitive statement. At the center of the book is a network (not an axis, alliance or bloc) of dictatorships: Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, Syria, Cuba, Belarus, Myanmar, Zimbabwe, North Korea plus a dozen-odd others who are seeking to change the international system in order to keep their regimes in power and to preserve their leaders’ wealth. They are not united ideologically. They do not meet either openly or secretly to make policy. They have many conflicts with one another.

The only thing that bring them together is their dislike of the democratic world, whose language and ideals are a threat to their form of power. The book focuses on the things they have in common: kleptocracy, information war tactics, diplomatic and military collaboration and a common approach to dissent. "
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom